Upload
drpeterdickens
View
241
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
1/22
Legacy leadership: The leadership wisdom of the Apostle Paul
J. Lee Whittington a,T, Tricia M. Pitts b, Woody V. Kagelerb, Vicki L. Goodwin c
a University of Dallas, United Statesb Texas Wesleyan University, United Statesc
University of North Texas, United States
Abstract
There is recent increasing interest in the spiritual dimensions of work, organizations and leadership coupled
with heightened interest in Biblical perspectives on leadership. For example, recent works by Manz [Manz, C.
(1998). The leadership wisdom of Jesus: Practical lessons for today. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.] and Manz,
Manz, Marx, & Neck [Manz, C., Manz, K., Marx, R., and Neck, C. (2001). The wisdom of Solomon at work:
Ancient virtues for living and leading today. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.] examined the leadership styles of
Jesus and various Old Testament characters. In this article, we identify 10 leadership qualities of the Apostle Paul
based on Pauls first letter to the Thessalonians. These qualities represent the motives and methods necessary forlegacy leadership. We present logic for a causal model of spiritual leadership that represents evidence of legacy
leadership in terms of the changed lives of followers. The legacy of the leaders influence is perpetuated through
the followers incorporation of legacy principles into their lives as they become leaders.
D 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords:Leadership; Emotional intelligence; Motives
1. Introduction
Recently there has been a growing interest in the popular press addressing the religious or spiritualimplications of employment. Several recent books, including The Working Life: The Promise and
Betrayal of Modern Work (Ciulla, 2000), Spirit at Work: Discovering the Spirituality in Leadership
(Conger, 1994),The Call: Finding and Fulfilling the Central Purpose of Your Life (Guinness, 1998),Let
Your Life Speak: Listening for the Voice of Vocation (Palmer, 2000), andThe Congruent Life: Following
1048-9843/$ - see front matterD 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.07.006
T Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 972 721 5276.
E-mail address:[email protected] (J.L. Whittington).
The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
2/22
the Inward Path to Fulfilling Work and Inspired Leadership (Thompson, 2000) emphasize the need to
evaluate the spiritual dimensions of organizations and careers. Within this general trend, there also has
been a heightened interest in leadership froma Biblical perspective. Titles such as Leadership by theBook: Tools to Transform your Workplace (Blanchard,Hybels, & Hodges, 1999), Jesus CEO: Using
Ancient Wisdom for Visionary Leadership (Jones, 1995), The Leadership Wisdom of Jesus: Practical
Lessons for Today (Manz, 1998), andThe Wisdom of Solomon at Work: Ancient Virtues for Living and
Leading Today (Manz et al., 2001)all discuss leadership from a scriptural perspective.
Although there is a growing interest in spiritual and Biblically-based approaches to leadership, there
has been little work in this area that has linked Biblically-based leadership ideaswith the social scientific
approach to leadership. An excellent exception to this is Wildavskys (1984) work on Moses. In his
book,The Nursing Father: Moses as a Political Leader, Wildavsky explicitly attempts to link the social
science and Biblical interpretations of leadership in a way that each bserves the otherQ (p. 2). In this
paper, we follow Wildavskys approach by examining the leadership qualities that guided the Apostle
Paul as he helped establish the early church. These qualities are based on an exegesis of Pauls first letterto the church at Thessalonica.
Our purpose is to use the qualities we see demonstrated in Pauls life and writings to develop a model
of spiritual leadership. First, we provide a brief introduction to Paul based on the accounts of his life
provided by Luke in the New Testament Book of Acts and Pauls own letters. Second, we identify and
discuss 10 qualities of effective leadership that we see in the life and ministry of the Apostle Paul. Third,
we develop a causal model of spiritual leadership (Fry, 2003)that focuses on the relationships among
these qualities and the means by which they are perpetuated through followers over time. Finally, we
discuss the implications of our modelfor future research in the areas of transformational (Avolio, 1999;
Bass, 1985) and servant-leadership (Greenleaf, 1977), motive patterns (Kanungo & Mendonca, 1996),
and emotional intelligence (Goleman, Boyzatis, & McKee, 2002).
2. Paul and the Thessalonians
2.1. Background on the Apostle Paul
The Apostle Paul was more responsible than any other individual for the spread of Christianity
throughout the Roman Empire (MacArthur, 1997). Often referred to as the bapostle to the Gentiles,QPaul
was perhaps the greatest Christian missionary and theologian who ever lived. Born in Tarsus around the
time of Christs birth (Acts 9:11, New American Standard Bible-Updated Edition,Lockman Foundation,
1995), he was a member of the tribe of Benjamin (Phil. 3:5) and also was a Roman citizen (Acts 16:37;22:25). He spent his early years studying with the celebrated rabbi, Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). Following his
father, Paul was a member of the strictest Jewish sect, the Pharisees (Phil. 3:5). By his own assessment,
Paul was fanatically committed to keeping every detail of the Jewish law: b. . .as to the Law, a
Pharisee. . .as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blamelessQ (Phil. 3:56).
Prior to his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul was relentless in his efforts to
destroy the new sect that was filling Jerusalem with its teaching and converts. Paul himself refers to the
zeal with which he persecuted the church (Phil. 3:6). Luke records that Paul was bin hearty agreement
withQthe stoning death of Stephen (Acts 8:1). After Stephens death, Paul bbegan ravaging the church,
entering house after house, and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prisonQ(Acts 8:3).
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770750
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
3/22
While bstill breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the LordQ (Acts 9:1), Paul was
confronted on the road to Damascus by the risen Christ. Jesuspointed out that Pauls persecution of the
Christians was the equivalent to opposing God. According to MacArthur (1997), Paul must have beenterrified that he was in the presence of God and devastated at the thought that rather than serving God he
was shedding the blood of Gods people. Following this miraculous intervention, Paul used his natural
zealousness to serve the Lord he had previously rejected, to proclaim the gospel, and to build the early
church that he previously sought to destroy. According to Luke, Paul was set apart by the Lord for a
unique ministry to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 13:46; 18:6; 20:6; 26:1517). Paul provides a personal
account of these events in his letter to the Galatians:
For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of
God beyond measure, and tried to destroy it; and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my
contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions.
But when He who had set me apart, even from my mothers womb, and called me through His grace,was pleased to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles . . . (1:1316).
By his own admission, Paul was not physically attractive. In his second letter to the Corinthians, he
says his bpersonal presence is unimpressive, and his speech contemptibleQ (2 Cor. 10:10). Tradition
holds that he was small in stature and had scars over his face and body from the many beatings and
stonings he endured (MacArthur, 1991). As with Moses in the Old Testament, these physical limitations
did not deter him from his mission or reduce his effectiveness.
Scholar F. F.Bruce (1977)calls Paul a man of letters and a man of action that left his mark on world
history. Christianity was founded in the land of Israel; its founder and initial disciples were Jews. Yet, in
little more than a generation after the death of Jesus, Christianity was recognized by the Roman
authorities as a predominantly Gentile movement. Additionally, Christianity emerged from southwestern
Asia, among people whose primary language was Aramaic. Yet, the foundational documents have come
down to the present in Greek. According to Bruce (1977), bboth of these phenomena . . .are due
primarily to the energy with which Paul, a Jew by birth and upbringing, spread the gospel of Christ in the
Gentile world from Syria to Italy, if not indeed to Spain, during the thirty years or so which followed his
conversionQ(p. 17). Paul belongs to bthat select company who leave their mark on their time, who mold
their contemporaries, and exert an influence which stretches far into the futureQ(p. 462).
Pauls accomplishments as a missionary also are emphasized byAllen (1927):
In little more than ten years St. Paul established the church in four provinces of the Empire:
Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia. Before A.D. 47 there were no churches in these provinces;
in A.D. 57 St. Paul could speak as if his work were done (p. 18).
2.2. Pauls first letter to the church at Thessalonica
Paul first preached the gospel in Thessalonica during his second missionary journey. Thessalonica
was a strategic center located on the banks of a harbor in the Thermaic Gulf near the northwest corner of
the Aegean Sea (Constable, 1983). The city also was located on the Egnatian way, the main Roman road
from Rome to the Orient. Thus, Thessalonica was a strategic center both governmentally and militarily.
After his initial visit to Thessalonica, Paul wrote two letters to the believers there. The first epistle to
the Thessalonians was written to meet several needs (Constable, 1983). First, Paul sought to encourage
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 751
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
4/22
his children in the faith to persevere despite persecution. Second, he refuted the accusation that he was
motivated by financial gain and personal need. Third, he wrote to correct a drift toward moral laxity and
laziness. While there are hints of Pauls personal leadership philosophy throughout his 13 NewTestament epistles, the essence of his leadership is most clearly presented in his letters to the church at
Thessalonica (MacArthur, 2002; Swindoll, 2002). In this paper, we focus on the 1 Thessalonians 1:2
through 2:12 passage. In these verses, Paul provides a great deal of insight into both the motive and the
method of his leadership style.
The Text
We give thanks to God always for all of you, making mention of you in our prayers; constantly
bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus
Christ in the presence of our God and Father, knowing, brethren beloved by God, His choice of you;
for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with
full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. Youalso became imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much tribulation with the
joy of the Holy Spirit, so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia.
For the word of the Lord has sounded forth from you, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in
every place your faith toward God has gone forth, so that we have no need to say anything. For they
themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God
from idols to serve a living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom he raised from
the dead, that is Jesus, who delivered us from the wrath to come. For you yourselves know, brethren,
that our coming to you was not in vain, but after we had already suffered and been mistreated in
Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel amid much
opposition. For our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; but just as
we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men butGod who examines our hearts. For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a
pretext for greed God is witness nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others,
even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority. But we proved to be gentle
among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. Having thus a fond affection for
you, we were well pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives,
because you had become very dear to us. For you recall, brethren, our labor and hardship, how
working night and day so as not to be a burden to any of you, we proclaimed to you the gospel of
God. You are witnesses, and so is God, how devoutly and uprightly and blamelessly we behaved
toward you believers; just as you know how we were exhorting and encouraging and imploring each
one of you as a father would his own children, so that you may walk in a manner worthy of the Godwho calls you into His own kingdom and glory (1 Thess. 1:2 2:12,New American Standard Bible-
Updated Edition,Lockman Foundation,1995).
3. Legacy leadership: a conceptual investigation of leadership qualities from Pauls first letter to
the Thessalonians
Pauls words from 1 Thessalonians 1:2 2:12 reflect an earnest, heartfelt desire to encourage the
young church he had founded on an earlier journey. It was Pauls intention to present guidelines for the
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770752
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
5/22
maturation not only of the young church but also for the individual believers. We have chosen bLegacy
LeadershipQas a reflection of the fact that Paul created a self-perpetuating model of leadership that not
only had an impact on the Thessalonians, but churches in b
Macedonia and Achaia, and also in everyplace your faith toward God has gone forthQ (1 Thess. 1:8). With our use of bself-perpetuating,Q we
acknowledge that Pauls leadership style was one that intentionally created other leaders, who in turn
created other leaders (seeFig. 1). This process was used by Paul throughout his missionary journeys so
that he could leave each place with the confidence that others we re prepared to continuehis work of
winning souls for Christ. Pauls method also is consistent with Koestenbaums (2002) definition of
LeaderWorthy of Imitation
FollowersBecome imitators of leaders
and example for others to follow
Followers themselves become
Legacy Leaders who are worthy
of imitation
FollowersBecome imitators of leaders
and example for others to follow
Followers themselves become
Legacy Leaders who are worthy
of imitation
Fig. 1. Legacy logic.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 753
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
6/22
leadership as the process of teaching others to lead. According to Wildavsky (1984), teaching others to
lead is the highest level of leadership. In this section, we provide an exegetical analysis of the passage to
provide a greater understanding of the intent and meaning of Pauls letter. In doing so, we identifyseveral qualities of effective leadership. These qualities are summarized in Table 1.
3.1. Worthy of imitation
The first quality we identify in this passage is that Paul was worthy of imitation; imitation is a
recurring theme in Pauls writings. In 1 Corinthians 4:16, he bexhortsQthe Corinthians to be imitators of
him. Later, in the same letter, he tells them to bbe imitators of me, just as I also am of ChristQ(1 Cor.
11:1). In his letter to the Ephesians, he encourages imitation of God (Eph. 5:1). In the letter to the
Philippians, he encourages believers to bjoin in following my example, and observe those who walk
according to the pattern you have in usQ(Phil. 3:17). This theme is repeated in Phil. 4:9: bThe things you
have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things; and the God of peace shall bewith you.QImitation also is emphasized in his second letter to the Thessalonians where he says he offered
himself as ba model for you, that you might follow our exampleQ(2 Thess. 3:9).
In 1 Thessalonians, he commends them for the fact that they had become imitators of bus and the
Lord.Q In doing so, they also had become examples for others to follow. In the original Greek, typos,
translated asexample, refers to a seal that marked wax or a stamp that minted coins (MacArthur, 1997).
The word originally denoted a mark made by a blow. The usage evolved and the word came to refer to
any image whether stamped or not. The word has ethical significance when it is used as a pattern of
conduct or, as it is in this text, as an example to be followed (Morris, 1991). Thus, Paul recognizes the
fact that the Thessalonians were leaving their mark on others. This is consistent with the idea so
prevalent in contemporary discussions of leadership that a leader must model the way for the followers(Bass & Avolio, 1994).
3.2. Boldness amid opposition
The second quality to be drawn from this passage is that effective leaders must demonstrate boldness
amid opposition. Paul states that bwe had the boldness [italics added] in our God to speak to you the
gospel of Godamid much opposition [italics added]Q(1 Thess. 2:2). It is widely accepted that leadership
is about change. In fact, the phrase bchange-agentQ is often used to describe the work of a leader.
Table 1
Qualities of legacy leadership
Worthy of imitation
Boldness amid opposition
Pure motive
Influence without asserting authority
Affectionate and emotional
Vulnerable and transparent
Authentic and sincere
Active, not passive
Follower-centered, not self-centered
Changed lives: The real measure of leader effectiveness
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770754
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
7/22
Zaleznik (1977)believes this is the key distinction between managers and leaders. Kotter (1990)also
identifies leadership as a catalyst for the change process in organizations. Change is usually met with
resistance if not outright opposition. Paul recognizes this fact and talks about the boldness to stay onmission despite the opposition. He refers here to the brutal treatment he and Silas received in Philippi
before coming to Thessalonica (Acts 16:1924, 37). There they were beaten and imprisoned. They were
arrogantly mistreated with false accusations and illegally punished despite their Roman citizenship
(MacArthur, 1997; Acts 16: 2021, 37). Paul experienced such treatment frequently, yet retained a
supernatural level of resilience. He reflects on this in his second letter to the Corinthians:
But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the surpassing greatness of the power may be of
God and not from ourselves; we are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not
despairing; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying about in
the body the dying of Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body. For we who
live are constantly being delivered over to death for Jesus sake, that the life of Jesus also may bemanifested in our mortal flesh. (2 Cor. 4:711).
When they arrived in Thessalonica they were physically intimidated and falsely accused of civil
treason (Acts 17: 57). Despite this treatment, they boldly proclaimed the message of the gospel.
Koestenbaum (2002)identifies courage as one of the four corners of his bleadership diamondQand refers
to the need to accept the loneliness that may come from standing by your convictions once you have
carefully identified what they are. He points out that leaders must be willing to take a stand in order to be
truly influential and expand their capability for bleadership greatness.Q Paul exemplifies this type of
courageous persistence.
3.3. Pure motive
The third leadership quality to be drawn from Paul is that of pure motive. In verses 2:3 through 2:6,
Paul goes to some length to defend his motive against the accusations that were being circulated by
opponents of the gospel and false teachers. Specifically, he addresses three charges. First, he addresses
the claim that his message was false by stating that his message did not come from berror.Q As the
Thessalonians were well aware, Paul was initially met with ill treatment when he first addressed them.
Yet, he persisted with his message despite these hardships. This demonstrated his concern for the truth,
not private gain (Morris, 1991).
The second charge was more serious. bImpurityQ denotes sexual impurity, which was a common
feature of many cults during this period. Ritual prostitution was performed in many temples with the idea
that if a person was physically united with a messenger of one of the gods, they were also united with thegod (Morris, 1991). Apparently some of Pauls detractors had made a similar accusation. Paul
emphatically rejects this charge.
The third accusation has to do with the methods employed by the apostle. The phrase bby way of
deceitQrefers to trickery. Originally, it referred to using bait to catch fish. The usage evolved to mean any
piece of cunning and was descriptive of the wandering Sophists and jugglers who resorted to various
tricks to attract people and take their money (Morris, 1991).
Paul draws a strong contrast between himself and his accusers. He refutes these accusations in verse 4.
He states that his message could not have come from error because God entrusted him with the gospel
message. He was not impure because he had been selected, tested, and approved by God. Finally, he was
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 755
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
8/22
not a trickster because he sought to please God, not men. Paul is claiming that the purity of his motive is
not a superficial effort at impression management because he points out that God examines the heart, not
merely external appearances (1 Sam. 16:7). He offers a similar defense in his first letter to theCorinthians:
Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. In
this case, moreover, it is required of stewards that one is found trustworthy. But to me it is a very
small thing that I may be examined by you, or by any human court; in fact, I do not even examine
myself. For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one
who examines me is the Lord. Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait
until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the
motives of mens hearts; [italics added] and then each mans praise will come to him from God (1
Cor. 4:15).
Paul continues to defend his motive in 1 Thessalonians 2:56. Here he reminds the Thessalonians thatthey had observed his behavior (bas you knowQ) and issues three disclaimers to demonstrate the purity of
his motive. First, in stating that he bnever came with flattering speech,Qhe denied that he was a smooth-
talking preacher (MacArthur, 1997). In the Greek, flattery has the idea of using remarks as means of
obtaining some personal gain. It is a use of insincerity to persuade another to do ones will (Morris,
1991). Thus, Paul asserts that he was not trying to make a favorable impression to obtain some personal
advantage.
Pauls second disclaimer is aimed at the accusation that he had come bwith a pretext for greed.QThis is
another attack on his sincerity. Pretext refers to a mask that conceals the real motive. The word refers to
the idea of putting forth something that is plausible, that may in fact be true in itself, but is not the real
reason for performing an act (Morris, 1991). So here, Paul denies that his ministry is just a cover for anunderlying motive of greed.
The third disclaimer issued by Paul addresses the idea that he had sought the approval and esteem of
people. This reiterates the statement of verse 4. In verse 4, he says they did not pursue goals that would
meet with the approval of people. In verse 6, he claims that he did not seek praise for himself. Whereas
he and the other apostles may have deserved and received praise, that was not their motive.
Pauls emphasis on personal integrity and high standards of moral excellence are a refreshing contrast
to the greed exemplified in contemporary leadership scandals. The importance of such character traits is
emphasized in the recent work of ethicist WilliamMay (2001)who believes that it is imperative that we
bexamine directly the moral underpinnings of the marketplace and the moral status of corporate leaders
within itQ(p.131). This emphasis on character is also an integral part ofFrys (2003)model of spiritual
leadership, and is clearly connected to recent work on inauthentic, or pseudo-transformational,leadership (Price, 2003).
3.4. Influence without asserting authority
The fourth quality of Pauls leadership style is that he exerted influence without asserting authority.
The phrase beven though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authorityQrefers to demands
that the apostle might have made on the Thessalonians for physical and financial support. Rather than
doing this, Paul worked night and day so as not to be a burden. He lived on what he earned as a
tentmaker and the offerings from the Philippians. By earning his own way, Paul further demonstrated the
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770756
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
9/22
purity of his motives which, in turn, gave him a platform for influence that did not rely on the authority
of his title or position. He reiterates this point and again emphasizes in his second letter to the
Thessalonians the importance of leaders modeling the behavior they seek to see developed in theirfollowers. In 2 Thessalonians 3:79, Paul says:
For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an
undisciplined manner among you, nor did we eat anyones bread without paying for it, but with
labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you;
not because we do not have the right to this ,but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so
that you would follow our example [italics added].
In his letter to the church in Ephesus, Paul specifically addressed the relationships between masters
and slaves. In that passage (Eph. 6:59), Paul reminds both parties that they are to treat each other with
respect bas to the LordQand then explicitly tells the masters to bgive up threatening.QPauls pure motive
allowed him to operate from a base of referent power ( French & Raven, 1959), even though he couldhave used the reward, coercive, or legitimate power bases available to him because of his position.
Referent power also is a key aspect in transformational leadership theory and is exemplified in the use of
ascribed charisma and inspirational motivation behaviors to encourage followers toward vision
accomplishment (Bass, 1985; Bass & Avolio, 1994).
3.5. Affectionate and emotional
In verses 7 and 8, we gain further insight into the apostles motive and method. From these verses, we
see that Pauls relationship with the Thessalonians was affectionate and emotional. He reminds the
Thessalonians that he b
proved to be gentle among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her ownchildren. Having so fond an affection for you. . .you had become very dear to us.QPaul used similar
imagery in his second letter to the Corinthians (2 Cor. 11:11) and in his letter to the Galatians (Gal. 4:19).
According toMacArthur (2002), btenderly caresQliterally translated refers to bwarm with body heat.QA
loving mother would take her baby in her arms and warm the child with her own body heat. This
metaphor shows the kind of personal care Paul sought to provide the Thessalonians. This same image
was used by Moses in his relationship with the Israelites in Numbers 11:12. As with Moses, Pauls
affection for those he led was like that of a mother who is willing to sacrifice her life for her child. This
parallels Christ who was willing to give up his own life for those who would be born again into the
family of God (Mark 10:45).
The phrase bamong youQindicates that Paul was in the midst of the Thessalonians, taking a place of
equality. Rather than separating from them based on his position, he lived among them. Far from tryingto achieve some personal or financial gain from them, he became one of them and lavished affectionate
care upon them (Morris, 1991).
3.6. Vulnerable and transparent
All too often, leaders feel they must create an image of invulnerability. They go to great lengths to
create a facade that cannot be penetrated. To maintain distance between themselves and their followers,
these leaders draw strict boundaries around themselves and do not share personal beliefs, concerns, and
fears with their followers. In fact, the first of theFive Temptations of a CEO (Lencioni, 1998)is to create
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 757
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
10/22
a mask of invulnerability. In contrast to this practice, Paul was willing to be vulnerable and transparent.
He states that he was bwell-pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but our own lives as
wellQ
(1 Thess. 2:8). The construction of this phrase in the Greek indicates that this was not a passingwhim but a habitual style (Morris, 1991). Paul and his associates never lost sight of the call to share the
gospel, thus the sharing of the gospel is mentioned first. This was their mission. However, to share the
gospel with integrity requires not only sharing the message but themselves as well. The word blivesQ
refers to the whole personality and refers to the innermost being. Literally, Paul and his colleagues were
sharing their bown soulsQwith the Thessalonians (Constable, 1983; Morris, 1991).
3.7. Authentic and sincere
In verses 2:1012, Paul reminds the Thessalonians byou are witnesses, and so is God, how devoutly
and uprightly and blamelessly we behaved toward you believers.Q According to the law of the Old
Testament, two or more witnesses were required to verify truth (Num. 35:30; Deut. 19:15). Consistentwith this law, Paul called both the Thessalonians and God as witnesses to affirm his holy conduct
(MacArthur, 1997). Evident in the text is the legitimacy and sincerity of Pauls ministry. Earlier, in verse
5, he had called on the Thessalonians as people who knew the facts and invoked God as witness to the
truth of his message (Morris, 1991). Here he does the same and even more emphatically.
Paul used three adverbs to indicate the authenticity and sincerity of his conduct and motives
devoutly, uprightly, and blamelessly. His inner convictions led to holy and devout behavior. With
reference to Gods high standards, his, Silvanus (Silas) and Timothys behaviors were upright and
righteous. Thus, they measured up to Gods expectations and requirements. Their conduct was blameless
and irreproachable, able to stand the scrutiny of critics (Constable, 1983).
3.8. Active, not passive
Earlier, Paul used the image of a tender mother nursing her young children. In verses 2:1112, he
invokes the image of a father who responsibly disciplines his children. The image here is that of a loving
father who trains and instructs his children. This training was active, not passive, and involved verbal
instruction as well as the modeling discussed earlier. The word exhorting refers to strong positive appeals
aimed at directing the followers into suitable conduct (Constable, 1983; Morris, 1991). This word is
derived from the Greek word bparakaleoQand means bto call alongside.QThis word is related to the noun
bparakletos,Qwhich is translated bone who comes alongsideQ(MacArthur, 2002). So Paul here refers to
how he came alongside his spiritual children for the purpose of aiding, developing, and instructing them
in their character development.Encouraging refers to comforting communications designed to cheer up and inspire correct behavior
(Constable, 1983). The word is reserved for the tender, restorative, compassionate uplifting needed by a
struggling, burdened, heartbroken child (MacArthur, 2002). To implore is to give a solemn and earnest
entreaty (Constable, 1983)and may refer to serious words addressed to slackers (Morris, 1991). In using
this word, Paul was warning his followers that deviation from the divinely prescribed course of conduct
had serious consequences. Taken together, these words indicate the personal touch of a loving father
(MacArthur, 1997).
The active nature of Pauls leadership is consistent with the fullrange of leadership advocated by
Avolio (1999). According to the fullrange of leadership view, the most effective leaders use a wide
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770758
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
11/22
variety of active transactional and transformational behaviors. From the transactional behavior set, these
leaders use management by exceptionactive and contingent reward, omitting the passive version of
management by exception. The transformational behavior set includes idealized influence, inspirationalleadership, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. The capability to use the full
range of those behaviors allows leaders to respond to all situations that arise with followers so that they
can be loving and encouraging, yet corrective and demanding when needed, much as a father is with
his children.
3.9. Followercentered, not selfcentered
For Paul, the goal of this strong exhortation is always aimed at the development of the follower. Paul
says that he has engaged in this coaching bso that you would walk in a manner worthy of the God who
calls you into His own kingdom and gloryQ(1 Thess 2:12). Thus, Pauls strong appeal is to lead lives
worthy of God, for this is the highest goal for those who have been saved by grace through faith in Christ(Eph. 2:89). For Paul, the verb bwalkingQis a favorite phrase that refers to the whole of ones life. Thus,
he urged the Thessalonians to live their entire lives in a manner worthy of Gods calling. This emphasis
on raising the Thessalonians to a higher calling is consistent with the idea that transformi ng leadership
raises the level of human conduct and the ethical aspirations of both the leader and the led (Burns, 1978).
3.10. Changed lives: the real measure of leader effectiveness
From this passage we have identified several qualities of leadership from the life and ministry of the
Apostle Paul. These qualities have addressed motives as well as behavior. But what impact did Pauls
leadership have? How is the effectiveness of leadership to be measured? Contemporary leadershipscholars often measure the impact of leadership on individual dimensions such as in-role (job
requirements) and extra-role (organizational citizenship behaviors) performance, satisfaction and
commitment, or organizational level performance such as market share or profitability. Avolio (1999)
has challenged these approaches to the measurement of leader effectiveness. According to him,
transformational leadership only has an indirect effect on these outcomes. The impact of a leader comes
through building trust, identification, and a willingness to support the leader and the organization
(Avolio, 1999). More recently, the traditional approach to understanding leader effectiveness has been
challenged by Lord & Brown (2004). According to them, bultimately, leadership is a process of
influence . . .and the effectiveness of a leader depends on his or her ability to change subordinatesQ
[italics added] (p. 7).
Consistent with the view advocated by Lord & Brown (2004), the measure of the Apostle Paulsleadership is the changed lives of those to whom he ministered: bYou also became [italics added]
imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much tribulation with the joy of the Holy
Spirit, so that you became [italics added] an example to all the believers in Macedonia and AchaiaQ(1
Thess. 1:67). The key point here is that the Thessalonians became imitators. Just as Paul was
transformed by his personal encounter with the risen Christ and became an imitator of Him, the
Thessalonians were transformed by their encounter with Paul. As discussed earlier, they were bmarkedQ
and in turn became examples for others who were thus transformed. By being worthy of imitation, Paul
created a legacy that continues to provide an example of leadership that creates other leaders who
themselves are worthy of imitation.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 759
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
12/22
In his pioneering work on Moses as a political leader, Wildavsky (1984) states that Moses was a
bleader who taught his people to do without him by learning how to lead themselves (p.1).Q For
Wildavsky this represents the highest level of leadership. This same process can be observed in Paulsdevelopment of his protege, Timothy. In Acts 16:13, Paul selects Timothy to accompany him on his
missionary journeys. In Acts 16:4, Luke reports that Paul and Timothy were together to deliver the
decrees to the cities outside of Jerusalem. Paul refers to working with Timothy in the opening greetings
of six of his epistles (2 Cor., Phil., Col., 1 and 2 Thess., and Philem.). In other passages, Paul refers to
sending Timothy out on assignments (1 Cor. 4:17; 1 Cor. 16:10; Phil. 2:19). Finally, Paul assigned
Timothy to the pastor role of the church in Ephesus, urging him to:
remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, nor pay
attention to myths and endless genealogies which give rise to mere speculation rather than
furthering the administration of God which is by faith (1 Tim. 1:3).
Pauls instructions in his two letters to Timothy and his letter to Titus, referred to as the PastoralEpistles, provide the foundation for church leadership by identifying the qualities that should
characterize those who would serve as elders and deacons. Thus, Pauls legacy of creating leaders
who are capable of leading without him continues to this day.
4. An integrative model of legacy leadership: motives and methods
InFig. 2, we present a model of spiritual leadership that identifies each of Pauls qualities of a legacy
leader as either a motive, method, or outcome of legacy leadership. Paul was a servant, and he
transformed others lives. He had the right motivation (his conversion experience and ultimate desire todo what Jesus called him to do), and he had the capability. Pauls behavior was never at odds with his
purpose and was a clear representation of the driving force behind his actions. Thus, his motives and his
methods were in correspondence with one another. This congruence between Pauls motives and
methods provided a base for Paul to assert bmoral authorityQ(Stanley, 1999).
Not only were Pauls motives and methods in congruence, his motives and methods were anchored to
a standard that was outside of himself. Throughout his defense of his motives he referred to the fact that
God and the Thessalonians were witnesses to his pure motive and upright behavior. Pauls motives were
representative of a set of universal or consensus values (Fry, 2005; Fry & Whittington, 2005). These
universal values have emerged in research from a variety of areas including workplace spirituality
(Giacalone & Jurkiewicz, 2003), religion (Smith, 1992), character ethics and education (Josephson,
2002), positive psychology (Snyder & Lopez, 2001), and spiritual leadership theory (Fry, 2003). Thelink between an individuals motives and an external standard is the critical element in Fry &
Whittingtons (2005) approach to authentic leadership. According to Fry (2005), an individual whose
values, attitudes, and behavior are congruent with these consensus values will experience ethical well-
being, which leads to joy, peace, and serenity. Clearly, Pauls life bore these characteristics which he
referred to as the bfruit of the spiritQ (Gal. 5:2223).
InTable 2, we have identified four of the qualities of a legacy leader as representing Pauls motives,
and five that represent his methods. Motivation precedes behavior; although behavior may not
necessarily reflect ones motivation (Bass & Steidlmeir, 1999). Yet, we have suggested that Pauls
methods as a legacy leader did truly reflect his motives; and this point provides the most basic premise of
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770760
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
13/22
Leader Motives
Leader Methods
Perceived
Congruence
Between Leader
Motives and
Methods
Measures
FollowersChanged Lives
Pure
Motives
Authentic/Sincere
Follower -
Centered;Not Self -Centered
Affectionate/Emotional
Worthy ofImitation
BoldnessAmid
Opposition
InfluenceWithout
AssertingAuthority
Active; notPassive
Vulnerable/Transparent
BoldnesAmid
Oppositi
Vulnerable/
Transparent
Active; notPassive
Influence
WithoutAsserting
Authority
Fig. 2. Legacy leadership: A model of spiritual leadership.
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
14/22
our theory the behavior of a legacy leader is consistent with his/her internal motivation. Thus, we
propose the following:
Proposition 1. The motives of a legacy leader will influence the leaders choice of methods.
The true measure of the impact a leader has on others is represented by the degree to which they haveincorporated the leaders qualities into their own lives (Avolio, 1999; Lord & Brown, 2004). In order for
a leader to leave his or her legacy with a follower, however, the follower must firstperceive the leader as
one with pure motives who is worthy of imitation. Only under these c ircumstances will legacy leadership
be perpetuated in the follower through his or her changed life (seeFig. 2).
The mediating mechanism of follower perceptions has been emphasized by Lord and his associates
(Hall & Lord, 1995; Lord & Brown, 2004; Lord & Maher, 1993 ). According to their perspective,
leadership is not located solely in the leader or the follower, rather it involves the interpretation of
behaviors, traits, and outcomes produced as interpreted by the followers (Lord & Maher,1993). In fact,
Lord & Maher (1993) define leadership as the process of being perceived as a leader. Yammarino &
Dubinsky (1994)andAvolio & Yammarino (1990)also have examined the role of perceptions within the
context of transformational leadership, suggesting it is in the beyes of the beholderQ(p. 193).The interpretation of leader motives and behaviors by followers is crucial to the process of legacy
leadership.Dasborough & Ashkanasay (2002) suggest that characteristics of the previous interaction
between the leader and follower, attributions made for the leaders intentions, and follower
characteristics such as mood, experience, and role in the interaction (as a target or as a bystander)
will influence the followers perception of the leaders behavior. While acknowledging these situational
influences on information processing, our focus is on the importance of the role the leader plays in
eliciting accurate perceptions of his/her motives and methods.
Clearly, few, if any, would deny that perceptions guide behavioral and attitudinal changes. These
perceptions are behind changes in values or motivation. Within the context of the legacy leadership
model, it is important that followers perceive a congruence between the motives and methods of theleader. When the leaders motives and methods are seen as congruent, the leader becomes a legitimate
example for followers to emulate. Thus, the followers internalize the leaders motives and methods
and begin to act in a way that emulates the leader. In our model, bchanged livesQprovides a measure
of Pauls influence on his followers lives. Their lives changed because they were able to see Paul, in
his own life, bwalk the talk.QThat made his message legitimate, personal, and attainable. They were
willing to believe what he had to say and lived their lives as evidence of that belief. Thus, we propose
the following:
Proposition 2.The effects of a legacy leaders motives and methods on followers changed lives will be
mediated by the followers perceptions of those motives and methods.
Table 2
Motive, methods and measures of legacy leadership
Motives Methods Measures
!Pure motive !Worthy of imitation !Changed lives
!Authentic/sincere !Boldness amid opposition
!Follower-centered, not self-centered !Influence without exerting authority
!Affectionate/emotional !Vulnerable/transparent
!Active, not passive
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770762
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
15/22
From the perspective of legacy leadership, the changes in followers lives will be internal first.
Followers of legacy leaders internalize the motives and values they perceive in the leader. This
internalization may result in a shift from egotistical to altruistic motives, or a strengthening of alreadyexisting altruistic motives. Values also may shift such that leaders are not viewed as providing only
instrumental value to followers lives but also as having intrinsic value (Covey, 1990; Goodwin,
Whittington, & Bowler, 2004). These internal changes in motives and values will result in changed
attitudes toward the organization (job satisfaction, commitment) and in outward behaviors such as
increased performance, organizational citizenship behaviors, and other pro-social behaviors. Koesten-
baum (2002)advocates the position that leadership is not about what one does, but who one is. Thus, a
leaders behavior should provide evidence for his/her motives and values regardless of the setting; and
the leaders influence should likewise be demonstrated in his/her followers lives as they assume his/her
motives and values as their own. Thus, we expect the following:
Proposition 3. The impact of legacy leadership will be measured by changes in followers lives thatcome to reflect the motives and methods of their leaders.
5. Discussion
Recently, there has been a rapidly growing interest in identifying spiritual dimensions of leadership. A
subset of this movement has focused on the leadership styles of Jesus and various Old Testament
Biblical characters (Manz, 1998; Manz et al., 2001). Despite this growing interest, there have been few
attempts to link Biblical insights with the social scientific approach to leadership. One notable exception
to this trend is the earlier work ofWildavsky (1984)who explicitly links the leadership of Moses to the
social sciences. In this paper, we follow Wildavskys approach by examining the leadership qualities that
guided the Apostle Paul as he helped establish the early church. In doing so, we offer the Apostle Paul as
a prototype of what we call legacy leadership.
Our analysis of Pauls leadership style is based primarily on an exegesis of his first letter to the
Thessalonians. While there are limitations inherent in using a sacred text as a basis for building a
leadership model, we believe that the historical record shows that the Apostle Paul was very influential
in the establishment and early growth of Christianity as both a religious movement and social force.
Thus, we believe it is appropriate to examine the leadership philosophy and behavior that he used.
Through an examination of a brief passage in his first letter to the Thessalonians and other writings, we
have identified several qualities that guided him. Central to our understanding of Pauls leadership
approach are his motives and methods, and the consistency between them. Furthermore, throughfollowers perceptions of the legitimacy of a legacy leader, their lives are forever changed so that they
may perpetuate the process. Thus, our model is consistent with the belief that leaders should create
leaders (Koestenbaum, 2002).
5.1. Spiritual leadership and legacy leadership
Fry (2003) has provided a useful guide for the development of theories of spiritual leadership.
According to him, bspiritual leadership comprises the values, attitudes, and behaviors that are necessary
to intrinsically motivate ones self and others so that they have a sense of spiritual survival through
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 763
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
16/22
calling and membershipQ(p. 711). As such, bspiritual leadership taps into the fundamental needs of both
leader and followerQ (p. 711). According to Fry, this process involves creating a vision so that
organizational members experience their life as meaningful and that they can make a difference. Fry alsostates that spiritual leadership is based on altruistic love, by genuine care, concern, and appreciation that
is mutual and reciprocal between leaders and followers.
We believe that the legacy leadership model developed in this paper is consistent with Frys (2003)
conception of spiritual leadership. The Apostle Pauls motives were altruistic and completely centered on
his followers. Furthermore, through his vulnerability, his transparency, and his willingness to live among
the Thessalonians as an equal, we can see the mutual and reciprocal care and concern that characterized
the relationship.
In the context of the Thessalonians passage examined in this paper, bcallingQ would include the
sharing of the gospel and the response to that invitation. Pauls goal was to influence the Thessalonians
to bWalk in a manner worthy of the God who calls you into His own kingdom and gloryQ(1 Thess. 2:12).
In this application, calling seems not only to be an ultimate objective, but an ongoing process that alsocontributes to a sense of bmembershipQin the community of saints. Furthermore, this calling implies a
strong, positive vision that would impact others for good in whatever environment in which the leader is
operating. The love, care, and concern exhibited by Paul for his followers caused their lives to change
forever and to reflect these same qualities back to Paul and to their own followers as they became leaders
in the faith. The legacy leadership qualities we have outlined would seem to be aligned with Frys (2003)
idea of spiritual leadership.
5.2. Transformational leadership and legacy leadership
There are many parallels between the qualities we see in the leadership style of the Apostle Paul and thetransformational leadership paradigm that has been widely supported over the last two decades. Yet,
because transformational leadership deals only with the behaviors and traits of the leader, we believe that
legacy leadership transcends transformational leadership by explicitly identifying and addressing the
motives of the leaders. By addressing these motives, we also have acknowledged concerns over the abuse
of power and issues relevant to the recent work on pseudo-transformational leaders (Bass & Steidlmeir,
1999; Price, 2003). According to Bass (1998), while overt behaviors might appear the same, true
transformational leaders differ from pseudo-transformational leaders in terms of values, power motive,
social distance, and concern for follower development. True transformational leaders operate from a goal
of being bmorally upliftingQ to followers. They also differ from pseudo-transformational leaders by
channeling their need for power into bsocially constructive ways in the service of othersQ(p.185).
By explicitly discussing the bpower motiveQ within the context of leadership, as we have, andillustrating its significance to follower interpretations of the leaders behavior, we have incorporated an
important dimension of the leadership process not addressed in other models. We believe this is an
important element of the leadership process that is particularly relevant in light of recent concerns about
the abuse of authority and the unethical behavior of leaders.
5.3. Leader motive patterns and the problem of power
For many contemporary scholars (Bass, 1998; Burns, 1978; Kanungo & Mendonca, 1996), motive is
a major concern. This concern is expressed by Burns (1978) who drew a sharp distinction between
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770764
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
17/22
leaders and power wielders. Power wielders use the resources of their power bases that are relevant to the
attainment of their own purposes and may treat people as things. In contrast, Burns defines leadership as
a process that takes place in the context of a relationship between leaders and followers, whereleadership is inseparable from followers needs and goals. According to Burns, ball leaders are actual or
potential power holders, but not all power holders are leadersQ(p. 18).
Expansion on our model of legacy leadership could benefit from a more in-depth look at the power
motive. For example, the contemporary view of power is built on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964;
Emerson, 1962; Thibaut & Kelley, 1959), which views power as a function of the dependency target
individuals have on others (Pfeffer, 1981). Thus, the greater the level of dependency a follower has on a
leader, the greater the power that leader would have over the follower. If power is to be viewed as a
function of dependency, a key question then becomes bHow will those who have power handle the
dependencies of others?QAn individuals answer to this questionwill distinguish those who would be
leaders from those who are merely bpower wieldersQ(Burns, 1978). Those who lead have a deep moral
obligation to handle those dependencies delicately.In the Thessalonians passage examined in this paper, the Apostle Paul spends a great deal of energy
defending his motive. He makes a clear case that his motive is pure, that he is not seeking the approval
of men, and that he is not operating with a mask to conceal greed. As such, Pauls motive appears to be
in line with the altruistic motive pattern described by Kanungo & Medonca (1996). The altruistic
motive pattern is rooted in the intent to benefit others. Furthermore, altruistic leaders are characterized
by an institutional need for power. They are preoccupied with the concerns, goals, and interests of the
organization and its members. They yield their self-interest to that of the organization. They draw
primarily on the resources of their personal power base (i.e., expertise or attraction as perceived by the
followers). While relying primarily on personal power bases, these leaders also may rely on rewards
and sanctions as means of control and influence; however, they do so impartially and equitably. Powerfor these leaders is manifested in behaviors and feelings that serve to help and support the followers in
accomplishing their tasks.
Altruistic leaders also have an affiliative interest in their followers (Kanungo & Medonca, 1996).
They are motivated primarily by a genuine interest in them and relate to followers as individuals with
ideas and resources. Thus, followers are viewed as partners in problem solving and related activities
necessary for attaining organizational objectives. Consequently, supportive feelings permeate the
interpersonal relationships between altruistic leaders and their followers.
In addition, altruistic leaders are driven by a social achievement motive. They show a concern for
others and initiate efforts that focus on individual and collective capability. These leaders want to create a
better quality of life and seek to engage in meaningful organizational and social action in order to
influence the common good (Kanungo & Mendonca, 1996; Mehta, 1994).Because his ultimate motive was to benefit his followers, it is clear that Pauls leadership style is
rooted in the altruistic motive pattern. There are several indications that he took an affiliative interest in
his followers. By de-emphasizing hierarchy and position, Paul lived among the Thessalonians and
viewed them as partners in the perpetuation of the gospel. The image of a nursing mother and a loving
father certainly created supportive feelings that permeated Pauls relationship with them. While he may
have deserved and received praise and recognition from others, Paul was not motivated by that desire.
Rather, he subordinated his self-interest to the goal of spreading the gospel and pleasing God,
demonstrating an binstitutionalQneed for power. He drew on the personal resources provided by his
character and integrity. Furthermore, Paul focused on the capabilities of others as demonstrated through
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 765
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
18/22
his praise for their imitation of him (as a role model for Christians) and the fact that the Thessalonians
became an example for others. He praised their transformation and behavior as an exemplification of
their transformation. Research on legacy leadership should include consideration of the altruistic motivepattern as a potential means of operationalizing and describing the motives construct within our model.
5.4. Servant-leadership and legacy leadership
Servant-leadership (Greenleaf, 1977) is another theoretical perspective that should be considered in
conjunction with legacy leadership. Because servant-leadership is a follower-centered approach to
leadership that explicitly identifies the leaders motives for serving and leading, it differs from
transformational leadership and resembles legacy leadership. More recent research (Spears, 1998) on
servant-leadership has included specific leader behaviors or methods that a servant leader might use with
his or her followers. Legacy leadership goes a step further by including the mediating role of follower
cognitions and interpretations of the leaders motives and behaviors as the necessary means by whichfollowers, themselves, become legacy leaders. Furthermore, although the measurement of servant-
leadership has not been well established empirically, its dimensions should have implications for the
measurement of legacy leadership.
5.5. Emotional intelligence and legacy leadership
Recent work by Goleman and associates (Goleman et al., 2002) on emotional intelligence also is
relevant to legacy leadership. Emotional intelligence refers to a set of competencies that a leader uses to
handle himself/herself and his/her relationships with others. These competencies are separated into four
groups: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship management. Thesecompetencies generally represent characteristics of one who is confident and emotionally aware, able to
express emotion openly, but appropriately and positively, who is empathetic, and able to manage
relationships with and among others as needed.
Several of the characteristics of Pauls leadership style are consistent with the competencies of
emotional intelligence. For example, Pauls clear understanding of his purpose and the drive behind his
behavior represent aspects of the self-awareness dimension. His willingness to be vulnerable and
transparent is consistent with the self-management dimension of emotional intelligence. His affection for
the Thessalonians and his emotional appeals demonstrate his empathy, an aspect of the social awareness
dimension. The boldness amid opposition that he demonstrated shows his understanding of the change
catalyst role and the challenges associated with leading change, part of the relationship management
dimension. Pauls follower-centered leadership also is consistent with relationship management as is hisuse of referent power to exert influence without authority. As a result, it would seem that emotional
intelligence should be considered within the context of legacy leadership.
6. Implications for research
We have provided a casual model of leadership that integrates the leaders motive and behaviors into
the leadership process. While social science research has a long tradition of investigating leader
behavior, we feel there is a need to investigate the motives particularly the power orientation of
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770766
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
19/22
leaders. Research that explores the relationship between the underlying motives and the overt behavior
of leaders will beinformed by the cognitive process approach to understanding behavior pioneered by
Feldman (1981), Gioia & Poole, (1984), and Wofford and his associates (Wofford & Goodwin, 1994;Wofford, Goodwin, & Whittington, 1998). This stream of research established the relationship between
cognition and behavior. In particular, Wofford and his associates demonstrated significant differences in
the cognitions of transformational and transactional leaders. This may provide guidance for investigating
the relationship between leader motives and methods, and it may allow us to access followers
perceptions as a mediator of the motiveYmeasure and methodYmeasure relationships. Future research
should continue to emphasize the centrality of follower perceptions in the leadership process ( Lord,
1985; Lord & Brown, 2004; Lord & Maher, 1993; Yammarino & Dubinsky, 1994).
The legacy leadership model contains an implicit assumption that the leader has already developed the
characteristics identified (motives and methods). The model also implicitly assumes the followers are not
already fully formed as legacy leaders themselves. Thus, the measurement of bchanged lives,Qwhether in
behavior or in attitudes, will be crucial for identifying the influence of a legacy leader on followers.Longitudinal research is the best approach to examine such change. This type of research could require a
baseline measure of followers on a variety of constructs that might be influenced by a legacy leader; for
example, ethics, stage of moral development (Kohlberg, 1976), emotional intelligence, and motive
pattern. These measures would need to be obtained prior to their exposure to a new leader. Then
attributes of the leader would be assessed to determine to what degree they were legacy leaders. Over
time, their influence on follower behavior and attitudes could be determined.
Cross-sectional research also could be conducted to determine if followers of legacy leaders emulate
their behaviors and attitudes more or less than followers of individuals not considered to be legacy
leaders. The emulation, or self-perpetuation, of legacy leaders is a key to the theory we have developed
in our paper.The assessment of leader motives would be an important dimension of this proposed stream of
research. Of particular interest would be the relationship between the leaders motives and the followers
perception of the leaders motives. Do followers make accurate attributions of the leaders motives? This
aspect of our proposed model of legacy leadership would be strengthened by integrating research on self-
monitoring (Snyder, 1987). Nichols (2004) suggests that self-monitoring may help explain differences
between true transformational and pseudo-transformational leaders. Consistent with his propositions, we
would expect legacy leaders to be low self-monitors because their methods (behaviors) are consistent
with their internal motives, beliefs, and values. They would be less likely to be high self-monitors who
change their behaviors to match the situation. With experience, followers should be able to ascertain
whether their leaders are low or high self-monitors and, with this information, improve upon the
accuracy of their perceptions about the correspondence between the leaders motives and methods.
7. Implications for practice
If we accept the spread of Christianity and its enduring impact on civilization, the Apostle Paul must
be recognized as one of the most influential men in history. His motives and methods established
Christianity as a dominant cultural and religious force throughout Northern Africa, the Middle East,
Europe, and Western Asia (Allen, 1927; Bruce, 1977; MacArthur, 1997). The key question before us as
scholars and practitioners is: Are these motives and methods valid today? We believe they are.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 767
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
20/22
In an age when corporate corruption and executive greed have eroded the trust in leaders, there is an
ever greater need to advocate credible leadership that is built on a strong foundation of integrity. When
leaders demonstrate resilience and boldness in the face of opposition, people take notice. When leadersdare to be vulnerable and transparent, are not afraid to show compassion and emotion, followers are
attracted. When leaders choose to handle their followers dependency on them delicately and use referent
power even when their formal status provides reward and coercive power bases, people become
committed. When a leader is authentic and genuinely concerned about the well-being of his or her
followers and demonstrates an active commitment to the development of these followers, people are
changed. As followers are themselves transformed, they become examples for others and the process is
perpetuated. The result of the process is leaderful communities (Raelin, 2003) and companies full of
leaders (Spreitzer & Quinn, 2001).
Legacy leadership is a timely response given the recent rash of corporate scandals and executive
greed. However, the qualities discussed here also are timeless. We believe the qualities of legacy
leadership can be practiced in all leadership settings from the home to the classroom to the boardroom.But it all begins with motive, and the changing of a leaders motives may require a transforming
encounter on the road to Damascus.
References
Allen, R. (1927). Missionary methods: St. Pauls or ours? London7 World Dominion Press.
Avolio, B. (1999). Full leadership development. Thousand Oaks, CA7 Sage.
Avolio, B., & Yammarino, F. (1990). Operationalizing charismatic leadership using a level of analysis framework. The
Leadership Quarterly, 1, 193208.
Bass, B. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations . New York7 The Free Press.
Bass, B. (1998). The ethics of transformational leadership. In J. Ciulla (Ed.), Ethics: The heart of leadership (pp. 169192).Westport, CN7 Praeger.
Bass, B., & Avolio, B. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership . Thousand Oaks7
Sage.
Bass, B., & Steidlmeire, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. The Leadership
Quarterly, 10, 181217.
Blanchard, K., Hybels, B., & Hodges, P. (1999). Leadership by the book: Tools to transform your workplace . New York7
William Morrow & Co.
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York7 Harper & Row.
Bruce, F. (1977). Paul: Apostle of the heart set free . Grand Rapids, MI7 William B. Eerdmans Publishing.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York7 Harper & Row.
Ciulla, J. (2000). The working life: The promise and betrayal of modern work. New York7 Times Books.
Conger, J. (1994). Spirit at work: Discovering the spirituality in leadership . San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.Constable, T. (1983). 1 Thessalonians. In J. Walvoord, & R. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible knowledge commentary: New testament
(pp. 687712). Wheaton, IL7Victor Books.
Covey, S. (1990). Principle-centered leadership. New York7 Simon & Schuster.
Dasborough, M., & Ashkanasay, N. (2002). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leadermember relationships. The
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 615634.
Emerson, R. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 3141.
Feldman, J. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology,
66, 127148.
French, J., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. P. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power(pp. 150167).
Ann Arbor, MI7 Institute for Social Research.
Fry, J. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 693727.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770768
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
21/22
Fry, L. W. (2005). Toward a theory of ethical and spiritual well-being and corporate responsibility through spiritual leadership.
In R. A. Gialcone, & C. L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), Positive psychology in business ethics and corporate responsibility.
Greenwich, CT7 Information Age Publishing.
Fry, L. W., & Whittington, J. L. (2005). Spiritual leadership theory as a source for organization development andtransformation.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Honolulu, HA.
Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2003). Toward a science of workplace spirituality. In R. A. Giacalone, & C. L.
Jurkiewicz (Eds.),Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance(pp. 328). New York7M. E. Sharp.
Gioia, D., & Poole, P. (1984). Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review, 9, 449459.
Goleman, D., Boyzatis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston7
Harvard Business School Press.
Goodwin, V. L., Whittington, J. L., & Bowler, M. (2004). LMX and social capital. Paper presented at the meeting of the
Academy of Management, New Orleans, LA.
Greenleaf, R. (1977). Servant-leadership. New York7 Paulist Press.
Guinness, O. (1998). The call: Finding and fulfilling the central purpose of your life . Nashville, TN7 Word Publishing.
Hall, R., & Lord, R. (1995). Multi-level information-processing explanations of followers leadership perceptions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 6, 265287.Jones, L. (1995). Jesus CEO: Using ancient wisdom for visionary leadership. New York7 Hyperion.
Josephson, M. (2002). Making ethical decisions. Marina del Ray, CA7 Josephson Institute of Ethics.
Kanungo, R., & Mendonca, M. (1996). Ethical dimensions of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA7 Sage.
Koestenbaum, P. (2002). Leadership: The inner side of greatness . San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In T. Likona (Ed.), Moral
development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues. Austin, TX7 Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Kotter, J. (1990). What leaders really do. Harvard Business Review, MayJune (pp. 103111).
Lencioni, P. (1998). The five temptations of a CEO . San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.
Lockman Foundation (1995). New American standard Bible-updated edition . Anaheim, CA7 Publications, Inc.
Lord, R. (1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership and behavioral measurement in
organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 87128.
Lord, R., & Brown, D. (2004). Leadership processes and follower self-identity. Mahwah, NJ7 Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lord, R., & Maher, K. (1993). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston7
Rutledge.
MacArthur, J. (1991). The MacArthur new testament commentary: Romans 18. Chicago7 Moody Press.
MacArthur, J. (1997). The MacArthur study Bible . Nashville, TN7 Word.
MacArthur, J. (2002). The MacArthur new testament commentary: 1 and 2 Thessalonians . Chicago7 Moody Press.
Manz, C. (1998). The leadership wisdom of Jesus: Practical lessons for today. San Francisco7 Berrett-Koehler.
Manz, C., Manz, K., Marx, R., & Neck, C. (2001). The wisdom of Solomon at work: Ancient virtues for living and leading
today. San Francisco7 Berrett-Koehler.
May, W. (2001). Beleaguered rulers: The public obligation of the professional. Louisville, KY7Westminster John Knox Press.
Mehta, P. (1994). Empowering the people for social achievement. In R. Kanungo, & M. Mendonca (Eds.), Work motivation:
Models for developing countries(pp. 161183). New Delhi7 Sage.
Morris, L. (1991). The first and second epistles to the Thessalonians, revised. Grand Rapids, MI7 Eerdmans.
Nichols, T. (2004). Identifying false leadersunmasking the masked. University of North Texas, department of management,working paper series. Denton, TX.
Palmer, P. (2000). Let your life speak: Listening for the voice of vocation . San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.
Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA7 Pitman.
Price, T. (2003). The ethics of authentic transformational leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 6781.
Raelin, J. (2003). Creating leaderful organizations. San Francisco7 Berrett-Koehler.
Smith, H. (1992). The worlds religions . New York7 Peter Smith.
Snyder, M. (1987). Private appearance/public realities: The psychology of self-monitoring. New York7 Freeman.
Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2001). Handbook of positive psychology. New York7 Oxford University Press.
Spears, L. (1998).Insights on leadership: Service, stewardship, spirit, and servant-leadership . New York7John Wiley & Sons.
Spreitzer, G., & Quinn, R. (2001). A company of leaders . San Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.
Stanley, A. (1999). Visioneering. Sisters, OR7 Mutltnomah Publishers, Inc.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770 769
8/10/2019 Whittington 2005 Apostle Paul[1]
22/22
Swindoll, C. (2002). Paul: A man of grace and grit. Nashville, TN7 W Publishing Group.
Thibaut, J., & Kelley, H. (1959). The social psychology of groups . New York7 Wiley.
Thompson, C. M. (2000). The congruent life: Following the inward path to fulfilling work and inspired leadership . San
Francisco7 Jossey-Bass.Wildavsky, A. (1984). The nursing father: Moses as a political leader. Tuscaloosa, AL7 University of Alabama Press.
Wofford, J. C., & Goodwin, V. L. (1994). A cognitive interpretation of transactional and transformational leadership theories.
The Leadership Quarterly, 5(2), 161186.
Wofford, J. C., Goodwin, V. L., & Whittington, J. L. (1998). A field study of a cognitive approach to understanding
transformational and transactional leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(1), 5584.
Yammarino, F., & Dubinsky, A. (1994). Transformational leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine boundary
conditions. Personnel Psychology, 47, 787811.
Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and leaders: Are they different? Harvard Business Review, 70, 126135.
J.L. Whittington et al. / The Leadership Quarterly 16 (2005) 749770770